Carolyn Hoessler, Alana Hoare, Lorry-Ann Austin, Harshita Dhiman, Sarah Gibson, Crystal Huscroft, Blair McDonald, Leanne Mihalicz, Jamie Noakes, Robin Reid
{"title":"Faculty in Action: Researching a Community of Practice Approach to Institutional Learning Outcomes Assessment","authors":"Carolyn Hoessler, Alana Hoare, Lorry-Ann Austin, Harshita Dhiman, Sarah Gibson, Crystal Huscroft, Blair McDonald, Leanne Mihalicz, Jamie Noakes, Robin Reid","doi":"10.1007/s41686-023-00084-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Increasingly, postsecondary education institutions are articulating institutional learning outcomes that define core competencies and evidence student learning to justify their value; however, concerns have arisen due to lack of authenticity, faculty autonomy, and representation of diverse disciplinary perspectives and worldviews (Lucas in Policy and Society 33(3):215–224, 2014). To actively engage faculty in co-designing institutional rubrics and learning outcomes assessment, we designed an action research project with the goal of examining and improving assessment practices related to institutional learning outcomes. The project is now in its fourth action research cycle; this paper describes the first two years of trialing a faculty-led community of practice approach to course-embedded assessment we call <i>Strategic Assessment of Institutional Learning</i>. We further describe the landscape of institutional learning outcomes assessment, two iterative cycles of action research, and seven themes that surfaced during the project. These seven themes informed the direction of learning outcomes assessment at our university: 1) student informed consent, 2) trust and community, 3) assignment selection, 4) rubric clarity and disciplinary variation, 5) framing the degree of student achievement, 6) implications for course redesign, and 7) faculty motivation.</p>","PeriodicalId":73753,"journal":{"name":"Journal of formative design in learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of formative design in learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41686-023-00084-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Increasingly, postsecondary education institutions are articulating institutional learning outcomes that define core competencies and evidence student learning to justify their value; however, concerns have arisen due to lack of authenticity, faculty autonomy, and representation of diverse disciplinary perspectives and worldviews (Lucas in Policy and Society 33(3):215–224, 2014). To actively engage faculty in co-designing institutional rubrics and learning outcomes assessment, we designed an action research project with the goal of examining and improving assessment practices related to institutional learning outcomes. The project is now in its fourth action research cycle; this paper describes the first two years of trialing a faculty-led community of practice approach to course-embedded assessment we call Strategic Assessment of Institutional Learning. We further describe the landscape of institutional learning outcomes assessment, two iterative cycles of action research, and seven themes that surfaced during the project. These seven themes informed the direction of learning outcomes assessment at our university: 1) student informed consent, 2) trust and community, 3) assignment selection, 4) rubric clarity and disciplinary variation, 5) framing the degree of student achievement, 6) implications for course redesign, and 7) faculty motivation.
越来越多的高等教育机构正在阐明机构的学习成果,这些成果定义了核心能力,并证明了学生的学习,以证明其价值;然而,由于缺乏真实性、教师自主权以及不同学科观点和世界观的代表性,人们开始担忧(Lucas in Policy and Society 33(3): 215-224, 2014)。为了积极地让教师参与共同设计机构规则和学习成果评估,我们设计了一个行动研究项目,目的是检查和改进与机构学习成果相关的评估实践。该项目目前处于第四个行动研究周期;这篇论文描述了前两年对一种由教师主导的实践社区方法进行课程嵌入式评估的试验,我们称之为机构学习的战略评估。我们进一步描述了机构学习成果评估的前景、行动研究的两个迭代周期以及项目期间出现的七个主题。这七个主题告诉了我们大学学习成果评估的方向:1)学生知情同意,2)信任和社区,3)作业选择,4)标题清晰度和学科变化,5)构建学生成就程度,6)课程重新设计的含义,7)教师动机。